ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2024
Current Status of Synthetic Mammalian Embryo Models.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The making of cells and organs in xenogeneic animal bioreactor.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- TEDD 2.0: an advanced temporal gene expression database enabled by in-silico functional analyses for developmental mechanism investigation.Science China. Life sciences · 2026Article
- Embryoid bodies as a model system for exploring early human embryonic development.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Review
- Stem Cell and Synthetic Embryo Models: Advances, Applications, and Ethical Considerations.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in three-dimensional culture technologies have facilitated the development of synthetic embryo models, such as blastoids, through the co-culturing of diverse stem cell types. These in vitro models enable precise investigation of developmental processes, including gastrulation, neurulation, and lineage specification, thereby advancing our understanding of early embryogenesis. By providing controllable, ethically viable platforms, they help circumvent the limitations of in vivo mammalian embryo studies and contribute to developing regenerative medicine strategies. Nonetheless, ethical challenges, particularly regarding human applications, persist. Comparative studies across various species-such as mice, humans, non-human primates, and ungulates, like pigs and cattle-offer crucial insights into both species-specific and conserved developmental mechanisms. In this review, we outline the species-specific differences in embryonic development and discuss recent advancements in stem cell and synthetic embryo models. Specifically, we focus on the latest stem cell research involving ungulates, such as pigs and cattle, and provide a comprehensive overview of the improvements in synthetic embryo technology. These insights contribute to our understanding of species-specific developmental biology, help improve model efficiency, and guide the development of new models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.